Sinfest

Jinx

A while back someone (I'm almost certain it was WoC, but I'm getting old and my memory fails me more often now.), posted a great explanation of why cell phone radiation CAN'T cause brain cancer. There was a great analogy about the energy of photons in the frequency range of cell phones, and trying to knock a hole in a house with ping pong balls.

I've never been worried about cell phone radiation. I was a microwave technician during my early days in the Army, so I have what I believe is a better-than-average grasp of the risks of various forms of EM radation. WoC's (or whomever's) explanation just made it more solid in my mind.

Recently, I ran across this article (It's about three months old.) talking about a study published in JAMA about how having a cell phone on for 50 minutes near your head (sound off) increases glucose metabolism near the antenna by 7%.

Both acknowledge that they don't know what, if any, clinical meaning this has. I certainly don't. I know we have some folks who are much more knowledgable about medicine, metabolism, and braaaiiins than I am, who might have some thoughts.

I also think it's interesting in that it shows how causation, especiallly in the body, can be so elusive. As I said, I've never worried about the EM radiation giving me cancer in my brain, but now I wonder if there might night be some other circuitious path from the cell phone to harmful effects.
_________________
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
- Charles Darwin

Lasairfiona · Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 6:47 pm Post subject:

Do cordless phones not do the same thing? Or bluetooth headsets? How extensive is the testing on this kind of thing? I have always completely dismissed the idea (though not with it related to bees...) so I have no basis of data.
_________________
Before God created Las he pondered on all the aspects a woman might have, he considered which ones would look good super-inflated and which ones to leave alone.
After much deliberation he gave her a giant comfort zone. - Michael

DeD CHiKn · Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 7:01 pm Post subject:

Fuck bees.
_________________
I have a face, with a mustache.

Usagi Miyamoto · Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 8:24 pm Post subject:

Wouldn't the epidemiological studies have shown even circuitous effects? They're basically just showing correlations - this population uses cell phones, they have this rate of some syndrome or other, that population doesn't, they have that rate of the syndrome, the difference is/is not statistically significant. So, when the studies and meta-studies generally show no effect, then both direct and indirect pathways are accounted for.

That's not to say that there's no effect, just that whatever effect there is, is either small or swamped by other effects, or doesn't do something measured by the study. So, maybe cell phone usage stimulates local glucose metabolism, but that has no further effect on, I dunno, cancer, heart disease, singing along with the radio in your car, whatever the studies have looked at. But maybe it does make your head fatter. So far nobody has thought to measure before and after head circumference. But when they do...

I wonder if they did controls where they measured the effect of having a diffuse 1-watt heat source next to the head? That's roughly the maximum conceivable effect of the radio transmission. The frequencies are far too low to be ionizing, and our bodies are mostly transparent to those frequencies, anyway. Come to think of it, if the cell phone is turned on and transmitting, it's probably a heat source like that anyway.
_________________
The reward for a good life is a good life.

Jinx · Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 9:06 pm Post subject:

Jinx · Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 9:18 pm Post subject:

WheelsOfConfusion · Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 11141 Location: Unknown Kaddath

I think it was to eliminate the chance of subject expectations of something happening when a cell phone is up to their ear. If both phones are up, but only one is activated, they can check that ear against the other to make sure it's not just a psychosomatic response to having a phone by their head.

Jinx · Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 9:32 pm Post subject:

Thy Brilliance · Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 3213 Location: Relative

Amon · Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 290

Interesting development.

Usagi Miyamoto · Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 7:29 am Post subject:

You mean this?
_________________
The reward for a good life is a good life.

Lasairfiona · Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 5:41 pm Post subject:

STLToday stated it in much more dire terminology.

Also, I meant to post this long before now but I presented this topic to a psychologist friend of mine who has his finger in a lot of research. No, he isn't a neurologist but I have found him to be a accurate source of knowledge on the brain and how it works. Here is his take:

mouse · Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 15457 Location: under the bed

your friend's explanation seems quite reasonable, if somewhat surprising (from the number of people i have had to walk around in grocery stores who stand there with cellphone to ear, apparently having to be coached step-by-step through picking up a few groceries, i had assumed cellphone use pretty much put an end to brain activity).
_________________
aka: neverscared!

Lasairfiona · Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:18 pm Post subject:

It makes me wonder if video calls wouldn't be safer while driving than just audio calls. Very Happy

_________________
Before God created Las he pondered on all the aspects a woman might have, he considered which ones would look good super-inflated and which ones to leave alone.
After much deliberation he gave her a giant comfort zone. - Michael

Willem · Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 6306 Location: wasteland style

literally everything is linked to cancer
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose